Steamをインストール
ログイン
|
言語
简体中文(簡体字中国語)
繁體中文(繁体字中国語)
한국어 (韓国語)
ไทย (タイ語)
български (ブルガリア語)
Čeština(チェコ語)
Dansk (デンマーク語)
Deutsch (ドイツ語)
English (英語)
Español - España (スペイン語 - スペイン)
Español - Latinoamérica (スペイン語 - ラテンアメリカ)
Ελληνικά (ギリシャ語)
Français (フランス語)
Italiano (イタリア語)
Bahasa Indonesia(インドネシア語)
Magyar(ハンガリー語)
Nederlands (オランダ語)
Norsk (ノルウェー語)
Polski (ポーランド語)
Português(ポルトガル語-ポルトガル)
Português - Brasil (ポルトガル語 - ブラジル)
Română(ルーマニア語)
Русский (ロシア語)
Suomi (フィンランド語)
Svenska (スウェーデン語)
Türkçe (トルコ語)
Tiếng Việt (ベトナム語)
Українська (ウクライナ語)
翻訳の問題を報告
For now Workshop is only supposed to be WebM and mp4 + h.264, the editor just has no detection for the codec yet.
Not even Firefox can bundle open-source h.264 code: http://www.techspot.com/news/51702-mozilla-gives-in-adds-h264-video-support-to-firefox-nightly-builds.html
Edit: And what Firefox is doing now is pulling Cisco's h.264 binaries: http://blogs.cisco.com/collaboration/open-source-h-264-removes-barriers-webrtc they don't have h.265 though. And it probably wouldn't have hardware acceleration if they had it.
I'm not opposed to it, but right now what's on my mind is finishing Early Access and the Windows version. If I want to support more OS, then I think open-source of some kind would make most sense anyway.
Not a special reason, rather a pragmatic one as H.265 is superior to H.264 in every aspect. In most cases you get half the filesize at the same visual quality. VP9 is the next best thing I can get at 1080p, so I guess I'll use that for newer uploads in the meantime.
I guess you could say the footage gets decompressed in memory anyway and for wallpaper uses, having not-so-intelligent encoder may be actually beneficial for faster decode performance, but I haven't found notable differences between H.264 and H.265 in that regard, at least on my machine.
The problem is that H.265 is still not so widely supported on all systems. Even if it can be decoded, it will still require a lot of CPU power without the aid of the state-of-the-art GPUs. That's why from time to time you will hear people complaining about some video wallpapers not working or taking up too much CPU power.
Considering that your wallpapers ain't that big in terms of filesize, you will get the same visual quality with H.264 with just around 50% filesize increase, not a big deal in my opinions.
The decoding speed doesn't seem that much different on my end, but you're right that the codec is in a problematic spot. There's also AV1 coming in a few months which will probably solve the situation long term, so I'll just use VP9 and wait.